tv [untitled] August 5, 2010 1:00am-1:30am PST
water industry will probably be 10, 20 years apart. over time, it will be replaced by newer technologies. this will be the cycle for a successful technology, but it could also turn out to be a failure in the first applications. so how much risk is involved, how much are we willing to take? i believe each situation, whether there is a large capital investment involved, what are the consequences to regulatory compliance? also, if there is a contingency
plan. in the case of the biosolids project, we need something that is reliable, this is a large capital investment, so this is not something we can abandon. the recommendation to stay with digestion as a base technology for solids is based on that consideration. there are also technologies that can work with the digestion that can provide additional benefits. for the technology we are considering for ssip, if it involves a major investment and has a very large regulatory
consequences, we would require these technologies to have proven record of operation. and that usually means a minimum number and size of installations, minimum number of years of operation. we would like to be on the forefront of technology and development. we have been actively engaged in research and development and we are recommending ssip also provide funding of resources to continue this effort. the summary table again of the technologies we are proposing to be included in the ssip. as you can see, we have also pilot tested many of them.
the next two slides -- >> [no audio] you are saying all of these? >> the ones that are highlighted in yellow. >> how about green? >> those are the regional effort we are participating in. >> back to some examples of the current and past pilot studies. lower right corner, using thermal panels which we tested.
we are developing a larger scale test. >> thermal drying is not highlighted in no. 39. >> it is under solar drying. >> this is the second time i have seen the presentation, and it is great, but i am curious, four other waste water agencies in the country getting ready to make similar types of investment, are they moving along the same lines that you are proposing, in terms of the type of technology that you are proposing we use? i am guessing -- i hear that we are connected with other waste water agencies.
are there other agencies making similar types of investments to their facilities, are they talking about the same type of technology? >> the consequences may be different, depending on the agency. some of them may not have a limited footprint requirement. [inaudible] >> i think part of the issue is coming if you look at imager recycle, are we going to be the last ones in the country to build this digestion cycle?
i do not want to be behind. >> [inaudible] >> there can be, in particular -- in the past few weeks there was a waste water conference where we had general managers from other cities, the head of the d.c. program out. and they were among the first to support this type of process. solar drying has been automated and taken to the next level in germany. what we're doing internally to have some tea the billing -- team building is we are having lunch together every week. we talk about what everyone is doing. we have heard from australia, new york, arizona, what is
happening with portland, we are interested in watching los angeles of bit longer on that one. certainly, we have had other property in the watershed. >> if you could address the general manager's claim -- where are we on the continuation of technology? >> we know where we want to be. and we are using centrifuges for dewatering and taking it out of the county. the chart that we showed you, where we want to be, we need to be careful about the bleeding edge of technology. what is available out there, we are looking ahead.
brown bag lunches, meeting with companies, many in the room, to see what other agencies are doing. d.c. water is taking a stand, and doing these things. based upon our footprint, what we have there, we thought it would work well. we still have something to do with, about that is something to take into consideration. when we talk about uv, we have to be careful. you always have to have that landy. if you lose electricity, you are out of uv instantly. there will always be some other
way to disinfect. we watch places like los angeles, we talk about the green field experience in 1980. and $800 million facility that never really worked. we want to be responsible for the funds that you are interesting with us, which is why we want to look carefully at these technologies and why we set up the criteria for these technologies that you have to have had it done for a certain amount of time somewhere else. we are fortunate that we have people who want to pilot these technologies to prove to ourselves, and you, that it works. as part of the alternative analysis, we will be looking at these things here, hopefully in combination, to make sure we are
not the last one to to get the model that is getting ready to be outdated. >> when in the process does the commission herar the range? >> site selection is pretty important for us. we have an idea of where we want to go. we are watching how it is being done in other places. supercritical oxidation is interesting, but we want to be able to couple the new tree removal pieces from some. the sludge press, that is also interesting. we are looking at future oem
costs. centrifuges it is a powerhouse. we want to move to something that is dryer cake. as far as the timing, i am not sure. >> is this what we really want to do? >> this will help to identify the status quo. where are we today, what is staff proposing so we can compare? part of the challenge, once the investment happens, we are locked in. >> the cambi process that was mentioned, it would be a full- scale unit.
at the end of the second bird shot today we would be looking for direction from the commission to hopefully proceed. one of our early upfront project is the biosolids project. we are looking to put on an rfp to have a consultant team to work collaborative lee with city staff, who would work with us to document and proof each decision that we make, so that we could bring a full project back to the commission saying this is our alternative, this is how we want to proceed with the analysis. we have a little ways to go. internally, process engineers have tested and feel confident. we hope to send a team to look at the installations. because we have been lucky to
spend so much time with the neighbors, we are able to be attuned to issues about noise, traffic, odors, anything that would be perceived as a negative, and we want to be able to mitigate. these are the things that i am repeating to everyone on our team to read going, seeing, knowing, talking to the designers on the other end. d.c. is great, but they do not have anything built. the one thing that was mentioned to me, biodiesel. we are pretty much the only ones doing the complete cycle. we do get approached to use our facilities occasionally as a testing laboratory. it is always an exciting thing.
this one does complement, so we will be looking at what the best use of fog is. i want to move to the next thing. >> i gather that as you come forward with a project alternative, you would detail the technology. as part of the process, this would be analyzed? >> air quality, water quality, everything, yes. that is our intention. >> the other piece in there that we do not necessarily see -- when a design team was put together to develop alternative, their work scope could specify how aggressive we needed to be to look at
alternatives. as an rfp for an outside consultant, that is not something that we would see. if we wanted to be a part of the routine design effort, that is direction we might give to staff. >> one last question. with these various technologies, do we have the proper land print to put them on? when we have to get more? the cambi and fog co-digestion, we have laid it out or withoutcambi. for solar drying, we would need additional land.
we would possibly have additional land to acquire for acquisition for additional drying. uv, there is a footprint that has been reserved to use that. we are always thinking about how and where. when we do build a new facility, we still want access to a side stream to be able to run new technologies as there are developed to test and see if we can find better ways to do business in the future. >> it helps us to figure out the life cycle cost, waste water, the nature of the grit. i really need to jump into collections. todd is coming up, which is exciting. one last section before lunch on
service and goals. i am going to speak briefly about the collection system odor control, which is something that we did not have time to get to. this represents the odor complaints received in 2009. what is interesting is they represent the entire city, there are there aredots in new -- are no disproportionate dots in any city. typically how we do this over control in the system is through
maintenance effort. grease traps, keeping sources clear, keeping grease collection out of it. removal of sand and debris. a lot of material but cumulates in the system but needs to be removed so that the system can run as smoothly as possible. certainly, cleaning of the system is included. however, there would be a capital effort including installation and construction of new vent systems, treatment systems. this is focused on some areas where we have had odor complaints coming issues, and can address them through the vent program.
this would enable venting of gases from the sewer system. >> you had made a comment the other day that the -- the number of complaints or dispersion of complaint areas was getting worse over time because of efforts to reduce the inflow? >> water conservation has been a wonderful but also difficult for us on the waste water side. less water is going through the system. the system is designed with a certain flow in mind to keep
things moving. now everyone is using less water and we are not always getting the momentum to move solids to the plant. if they sit, gases can form. we will look at some ways to flush dead ends and move things faster. with the hot weather, low water usage, that can accentuate our challenges. >> now we are in section 4 and i have two questions that i wanted to go through from the last meeting. we hope to go through this fairly quickly so that we can get to the first goal.
the first area was the -- what is shown is the boundary of the sunnyvale area in red. you have a little bit bigger figure in your hand down. sunnydale is in green. that area has been flooding for about 20 years at least. what we are backing up has been in service -- michael r. shaughnessy was still around. 20 years of flooding. but we also have some green
projects that are occurring in the area, too. that includes the schellege lock site. this is a redevelopment project that is looking to have some green storm water controls. we just completed construction on leeland st. and these are just some of the preliminary plants for the schlege lock redevelopment program. this is weekend avenue --leeland avenue. better storm water runoff, and enhances the neighborhood is is
the type of enhancements we will be doing, street by street, focusing on challenged areas. collection system replacement cycle. as we talk about the collection system, it was built, starting in 1970, over 70 miles of collection pipes. the replacement cycle we are recommending based on how long the system is expected to last is 110 years. within the system, 100 miles is a very high risk. that risk of failure. we are concerned we will have to replace this quickly. so we have analyzed several catch up periods and we have analyzed the annual cost to
come up with an aunt -- often mom catch up -- optimum catch up period. the trick is, everything keeps getting older. if you take a longer amount of time, more of your system fall into a high risk category. it involves a lot of changing variables. the great thing is, within the budget that we have moved forward with, we have jumped up to 10 miles this year, compared to 6 miles last year. we will be stepping up to up to 15. the way we are moving, we are on a 15-year replacement cycle.
we could go back to the prior cycle to speed that up, about what we're looking for this the knee of the curve. that would be the optimum catch up period. so if approved, we could catch up in 15 years and stabilize at 18.5. if we were to do that faster, we would see a steeper slope and have a higher r&r annual appropriation. >> i do not know how we can jump so greatly this year in 2010? >> they have things that are ready to go. we have an exceptional team of product managers on the r&r and
they have a full project list. we have a hydraulics team that just put this work out and they have it done down to a science. we have a package where we can have a template that is all routine check lists. they have already got these projects designed and ready to go. stepping up to the next level represents getting additional staff to sustain that. i were routine was 6 miles a year, depending on what occurred. sometimes, the priority gets the needed because of another construction, and then ask, delores. -- van ness, delores.
in this case, we have one full year. to sustain that, i agree, it will be challenging. we are going to need some additional tools to keep them going. i have requested a senior product manager that would be overseeing the r&r program and would be collaborating with the waterprise so maybe we can find a street where both need to repair replaced and we can have the optimization of cost. paving, excavation costs, closures, can really bring the price of a project of. and we are pretty proud of them. that is a credit to johnny wong. >> there is another graph where
this is the chart that tummy passed out to the commission. -- tommy passed out to the commission. that first wrote is response to a simple, -- sinkhole, other calls. in the condition, the second row, that is mileage that will be used to identify what will be replaced. not just this is facing all, this is what needs to be replaced. that will be what goes into the that will be what goes into the risk model to determine the